Your new experience awaits. Try the new design now and help us make it even better

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Endocrinol.

Sec. Bone Research

Volume 16 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fendo.2025.1538337

Clinical and radiographical analysis of percutaneous kyphoplasty with multi-point cement anchoring technique for preventing bone cement displacement in Kümmell's disease of stage I and II

Provisionally accepted
Heng  WuHeng Wu1Xiao  DaiXiao Dai1Hao  LiuHao Liu1Xiang  YangXiang Yang1Shenao  LiuShenao Liu1Shuang  XuShuang Xu1Hao  ChiHao Chi2Yuquan  ChenYuquan Chen3Song  WangSong Wang1*
  • 1Department of Orthopedics, the Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University Luzhou 646000, China, Luzhou, China
  • 2Clinical Medical College, Southwest Medical University, Luzhou 646000, China, Luzhou, Sichuan Province, China
  • 3School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing & Health Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

The present study introduced a novel technique called percutaneous kyphoplasty with multi-point cement anchoring technique (A-PKP) to prevent bone cement displacement in patients with stage I and II Kümmell's disease (KD).Methods: A total of 82 patients with stage I and II KD were treated with PKP in our hospital from April 2020 to October 2022. The patients were divided into two groups: A-PKP group (N=39) where the Kirschner needle was used for the multi-point cement anchoring technique, and conventional transverse process-pedicle percutaneous kyphoplasty group (T-PKP group; N=43) where the Kirschner needle was not used. The operation time, volume of cement, VAS score, ODI score, cement distribution pattern and score, bone cement leakage, adjacent vertebra fracture, and bone cement displacement were compared between the two groups. A logistic regression model was used to evaluate the association between outcome variables and vertebral fractures, as well as to identify potential protective and risk factors following kyphoplasty.Results: All patients in both groups were operated successfully, with no serious complications reported. Compared with T-PKP patients, A-PKP patients had longer operation time (39.7±4.86 min vs. 34.5±3.18 min, P < 0.05), greater volume of cement (5.1±0.41 ml vs. 4.3±0.27 ml, P < 0.05), greater improvement in Visual Analog Scale (2.0±0.48, 1.92±0.72 vs. 3.0±0.10, 3.1±0.62, P < 0.05) and Oswestry Disability Index scores (17.9±2.38, 14.8±2.02 vs. 20.2±3.31, 17.2±2.55, P < 0.05) during follow-ups, more spongy cement configuration with higher distribution scores (10.0±1.17 vs. 7.74±1.08, P < 0.05), lower incidence of bone cement leakage (20.5% vs. 27.9%, P > 0.05), and lower rate of adjacent vertebra fractures (5.1% vs. 18.6%, P < 0.05) and bone cement displacement (2.5% vs. 20.9%, P < 0.05). The logistic regression results reveal that bone cement distribution score (OR= 0.355, 95% CI 0.171-0.734, P=0.005) acts as protective factor following kyphoplasty.The A-PKP technique appears to be a safer and more effective alternative for patients with stage I and II KD. It effectively alleviates pain, enhances cement diffusion, and minimizes the risk of bone cement displacement compared with the T-PKP.

Keywords: Osteoporosis, Kümmell's disease, Percutaneous kyphoplasty, multi-point cement anchoring technique, Bone cement displacement

Received: 02 Dec 2024; Accepted: 26 May 2025.

Copyright: © 2025 Wu, Dai, Liu, Yang, Liu, Xu, Chi, Chen and Wang. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

* Correspondence: Song Wang, Department of Orthopedics, the Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University Luzhou 646000, China, Luzhou, China

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.